Court asked exclude driver as Subic rape case suspect
By JEFFERSON ANTIPORDA, The Manila Times Reporter
The lawyer of Timoteo Soriano, driver of the Starex van hired by four United States servicemen being accused of rape, asked the court Tuesday not to grant the motion filed by the prosecution panel seeking the reinstatement of his client among the accused.
In an opposition submitted to Judge Benjamin Pozon of Branch 139 of the Makati Regional Trial Court, Jose Raulito Paras, counsel for Soriano, asked the court to deny the motion to reinstate his client as accused for lack of merit.
Paras cited the doctrine of judicial courtesy forbids the court from ordering the reinstatement of Soriano because this will render moot the pending petition for certiorari before the Court of Appeal. He added that the reinvestigation conducted by the Department of Justice is null and void and does not bind the court.
Paras explained that on January 13, 2006, the Olongapo City Regional Trial Court Branch 73 discharged Soriano from the list of accused in the rape case, leaving Lance Cpl. Daniel Smith as principal and three others, Chad Capentier, Keith Silkwood and Dominic Duplantis, as coconspirators.
The prosecution filed an appeal before the court but was this was denied, prom-pting the 22-year-old complainant to file a petition for a review of the case before the Court of Appeals on April 6, 2006.
Paras explained that the proper administration of justice dictates that the court refrain from ruling upon an issue that has been submitted to the appellate court for review.
As for the second premise, Paras said the DOJ resolution directing the reinvestigation of Soriano on April 18, 2006, was promulgated without jurisdiction over his client, who was not a party to the appellate proceedings.
"Corollary thereto, Soriano was deprived of due process when the DOJ included him in the resolution of the appeal. This fatal infirmity of the DOJ proceedings, insofar as Soriano is concerned, rendered the DOJ resolution null and void and may be struck down anytime," Paras explained.
He also accused the prosecution of forum shopping when one of its lawyers was quoted in a news article saying that they might just drop Nicole’s petition before the appellate court should Pozon grant Soriano’s reinstatement.
Prosecution lawyer Evalyn Ursua denied Paras' claim of forum shopping, saying forum shopping is like choosing a venue that is more favorable to the prosecution panel.
"What happened is just part of the regular process when the private complainant filed a petition for certiorari seeking the reversal of the Olongapo RTC ruling while the DOJ has ordered a preliminary investigation against Soriano and it so happened that the DOJ was the first to come up with a result," Ursua explained.
The lawyer of Timoteo Soriano, driver of the Starex van hired by four United States servicemen being accused of rape, asked the court Tuesday not to grant the motion filed by the prosecution panel seeking the reinstatement of his client among the accused.
In an opposition submitted to Judge Benjamin Pozon of Branch 139 of the Makati Regional Trial Court, Jose Raulito Paras, counsel for Soriano, asked the court to deny the motion to reinstate his client as accused for lack of merit.
Paras cited the doctrine of judicial courtesy forbids the court from ordering the reinstatement of Soriano because this will render moot the pending petition for certiorari before the Court of Appeal. He added that the reinvestigation conducted by the Department of Justice is null and void and does not bind the court.
Paras explained that on January 13, 2006, the Olongapo City Regional Trial Court Branch 73 discharged Soriano from the list of accused in the rape case, leaving Lance Cpl. Daniel Smith as principal and three others, Chad Capentier, Keith Silkwood and Dominic Duplantis, as coconspirators.
The prosecution filed an appeal before the court but was this was denied, prom-pting the 22-year-old complainant to file a petition for a review of the case before the Court of Appeals on April 6, 2006.
Paras explained that the proper administration of justice dictates that the court refrain from ruling upon an issue that has been submitted to the appellate court for review.
As for the second premise, Paras said the DOJ resolution directing the reinvestigation of Soriano on April 18, 2006, was promulgated without jurisdiction over his client, who was not a party to the appellate proceedings.
"Corollary thereto, Soriano was deprived of due process when the DOJ included him in the resolution of the appeal. This fatal infirmity of the DOJ proceedings, insofar as Soriano is concerned, rendered the DOJ resolution null and void and may be struck down anytime," Paras explained.
He also accused the prosecution of forum shopping when one of its lawyers was quoted in a news article saying that they might just drop Nicole’s petition before the appellate court should Pozon grant Soriano’s reinstatement.
Prosecution lawyer Evalyn Ursua denied Paras' claim of forum shopping, saying forum shopping is like choosing a venue that is more favorable to the prosecution panel.
"What happened is just part of the regular process when the private complainant filed a petition for certiorari seeking the reversal of the Olongapo RTC ruling while the DOJ has ordered a preliminary investigation against Soriano and it so happened that the DOJ was the first to come up with a result," Ursua explained.
posted by OlongapoCity Zambales at
10:30 AM
0 Comments:
Post a Comment
<< Home